§ 23. Mr. ButlerTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Winchester (Mr. Browne) of 17 January,Official Report, column 133, he will indicate the major areas of cost reduction in the Trident programme.
§ 63. Mr. FranksTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence if, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Winchester (Mr. Browne) of 17 January,Official Report, column 133, he will indicate the major areas of cost reduction in the Trident programme.
§ 85. Miss Emma NicholsonTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Winchester (Mr. Browne) of 17 January,Official Report, column 133, he will detail the sources of the cost savings in the Trident programme.
§ 126. Mr. EvennettTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence if, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for 657W Winchester (Mr. Browne) of 17 January, Official Report, column 133, he will detail those areas in which there has been a real reduction in costs in the Trident programme.
§ Mr. YoungerThe £104 million real reduction in the Trident estimate since my announcement in January 1988 has arisen largely in the missile area, where there has been a reduction of about £100 million. In addition, there have been other smaller reductions of £8 million in the submarine area, and some £24 million in the equipment area. These reductions have been offset by the net effect of smaller changes in other areas of the programme.
§ 45. Mr. MaplesTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he has assessed the value for money received through the purchase of Trident; and if he will make a statement.
§ 127. Mr. HunterTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a further statement on the progress of the Trident programme.
§ Mr. YoungerI refer my hon. Friend to the answer that I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Winchester (Mr. Browne) on 17 January at column133 and to the detailed report on Trident which I placed in the Library of the House at the same time. These show that Trident remains outstanding value for money in providing effective deterrence.
§ 48. Mr. David ShawTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the extent to which Trident will provide the United Kingdom with a credible strategic nuclear deterrent into the 21st century.
§ Mr. Archie HamiltonThe Government's decision to replace Polaris with Trident was based on a full assessment of what was needed to maintain the effectiveness and credibility of Britain's independent strategic nuclear deterrent into the next century.
§ 73. Mr. Ron BrownTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he has received recent representations from the Amalgamated Engineering Union about the cost of Trident; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Archie HamiltonNo. Trident remains outstanding value for money in providing effective deterrence for this country.